Filed Date： 7/5/1849
Status： Precedential
Modified Date： 11/3/2024
confined the argument to the questions, whether the arbitrator could be examined to prove his own authority, that is, the submission to him; or in support or opposition to his award.
In the case put of an arbitrator having knowledge of the facts as a witness, his becoming a referee would not prevent his being a witness. So in an action not on the award, a referee might prove admissions of the parties, as any other person, who heard the admissions might prove them. (Slack vs. Buchannan, Peack’s N. P.) So where the submission was made a rule of court, arbitrators have been allowed to prove what was before them; but this was on an objection to the confirmation of the award by the court. (4 Harr. Rep., 234.)
But as to awards not made under rule of court; and where an action is brought upon that award, the referees are, upon grounds of public policy, imcompetent witnesses to prove the submission to them, or to sustain, or destroy their award.
The plaintiff was nonsuited.